Hi *,
both 2.5.7 and 3.0.3 have same behavior, so it's probably expected. But
still, looks wrong to me (in such case educate me).
SQL> create table foobar (id int primary key, foo int, bar generated
always as (foo+1));
SQL> insert into foobar values (1, 1);
SQL> update foobar set foo = 2 where id
values is valid, otherwise no update were made.
András
-Original Message-
From: Jiří Činčura [mailto:j...@cincura.net]
Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2017 11:52 AM
To: For discussion among Firebird Developers
Subject: [Firebird-devel] RETURNING clause returning NULL row when no value was
updat
29.11.2017 11:51, Jiří Činčura wrote:
The second update did not update any records, yet it still returns one
row in result with NULL value. Shouldn't it return empty result set?
"Update returning" is the same as "execute procedure". It returns fixed set of values,
not a result set.
--
W
2017. 11. 29. 11:51 keltezéssel, Jiří Činčura írta:
Hi *,
both 2.5.7 and 3.0.3 have same behavior, so it's probably expected. But
still, looks wrong to me (in such case educate me).
Hi,
"In DSQL, a statement with RETURNING always returns a single row. If the
statement updates no records, the
>"Update returning" is the same as "execute procedure". It returns
>fixed set of values,
> not a result set.
Hmm. I lived in a dream. I would argue that the i.e. "update foobar set
foo = 2 returning bar;" would return multiple rows and is allowed since
2.5. But quick test now shows that e
: firebird-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Firebird-devel] RETURNING clause returning NULL row when no
value was updated
"Update returning" is the same as "execute procedure". It returns
fixed set of values,
not a result set.
Hmm. I lived in a dream. I woul
: Re: [Firebird-devel] RETURNING clause returning NULL
> row when no> value was updated
>
> >"Update returning" is the same as "execute procedure". It returns> >
> > fixed set of values,
> > not a result set.
>
> Hmm. I lived in a drea
